I
imhomerjay
Guest
From what I recall reading, WHDH decided the costs of Wheel/Jeopardy weren’t worth it, and going with the somewhat lower but younger-skewing ratings coupled with the lower cost of the gossip shows was a better business decision for their needs. Crosswords is relatively cheap filler material, so picking it up may well fit with that same business philosophy.
Station managers are unlikely to be averse to game shows as a genre; if they’re in the business to make the most money possible, the aversion to game shows is that many of them have performed poorly over the past decade and a half. Some were just poorly done—the God-awful revivals of Tic Tac Dough and Card Sharks, the too-little-too-late attempt to correct the problems with the revival of The Joker’s Wild and the F-list celebrities on Match Game ’98 come to mind—and others were promised to stations to be the Jeopardy/Wheel killers, and just couldn’t deliver on those expectations—Trump Card, Price is Right ’94, etc.
To break through the morass of talk and court shows and reverse the trend in game shows’ declining popularity, something needs to really “pop” with the viewers. Millionaire had the advantage of the name recognition of the ABC version; perhaps the syndicated Deal or No Deal will have the same advantage. Family Feud also had some name recognition going for it, though it appears to be at the end of its current life cycle (putting it on par with the previous two incarnations, which isn’t bad). Weakest Link didn’t catch on, but the prime time version was more of a flash in the pan than a sustainable hit.
Start with the hosts—while both seem like nice enough guys, they’re relative unknowns who come across with all the pizzazz of toast. Like them or dislike them, hosts like Sajak and Trebek are stronger personalities. From day one, Sajak showed a sarcastic side. While it’s gotten more refined over the years, much as Trebek’s know-it-all tone has softened a tad, they had more commanding presences on their respective shows. The analogy isn’t perfect because both stepped into someone else’s shoes, but watching Crosswords and Temptaion, I get the feeling I could be watching just about any attractive, smiling face at the podium, not someone who will has the potential to be a “personality” in their own right.
The sets are ok, thought not especially eye catching. I get the “store” look for Temptation, but think they could have done something a little more abstract with the concept so that it doesn’t come across looking like a bad imitation of a store. For Crosswords, the placement of the giant monitor makes everything else look small by comparison; at least in Jeopardy, the game board is separate from Alex and the contestants, and serves as a good “opposite side” wall. Ty standing next to the video screen in Crosswords makes him look tiny, and the rest of the set feels like it’s empty.
The game play on Crosswords is decent, but the spoilers concept feels disjointed, with no real explanation of why they show up or how they get to be in those roles vis a vis to the first two players. Maybe if all five players had some kind of preliminary elimination round in which the lowest three finishers had to wait to play the spoiler round it would make more sense. Temptation’s game just seems inherently dull. Maybe it’s the focus exclusively on pop culture—at least other shows mix up the required knowledge base a bit more.
As a fan of the genre, I wanted the shows to be successful. I wanted to like them. Unfortunately, I don’t think they’ll fly, and it will add more support to the game-shows-don’t-generally-work theory. And maybe that’s true. Maybe people only want to watch squabbling (see the court shows and the Springer/Povich shows) and celebrity fluff (Regis, Ellen, etc.). So be it….my tastes aren’t in sync with the rest of the world. Besides, Jeopardy, Wheel and Millionaire are a good dose of daily games. More than that is just gravy.
Station managers are unlikely to be averse to game shows as a genre; if they’re in the business to make the most money possible, the aversion to game shows is that many of them have performed poorly over the past decade and a half. Some were just poorly done—the God-awful revivals of Tic Tac Dough and Card Sharks, the too-little-too-late attempt to correct the problems with the revival of The Joker’s Wild and the F-list celebrities on Match Game ’98 come to mind—and others were promised to stations to be the Jeopardy/Wheel killers, and just couldn’t deliver on those expectations—Trump Card, Price is Right ’94, etc.
To break through the morass of talk and court shows and reverse the trend in game shows’ declining popularity, something needs to really “pop” with the viewers. Millionaire had the advantage of the name recognition of the ABC version; perhaps the syndicated Deal or No Deal will have the same advantage. Family Feud also had some name recognition going for it, though it appears to be at the end of its current life cycle (putting it on par with the previous two incarnations, which isn’t bad). Weakest Link didn’t catch on, but the prime time version was more of a flash in the pan than a sustainable hit.
Start with the hosts—while both seem like nice enough guys, they’re relative unknowns who come across with all the pizzazz of toast. Like them or dislike them, hosts like Sajak and Trebek are stronger personalities. From day one, Sajak showed a sarcastic side. While it’s gotten more refined over the years, much as Trebek’s know-it-all tone has softened a tad, they had more commanding presences on their respective shows. The analogy isn’t perfect because both stepped into someone else’s shoes, but watching Crosswords and Temptaion, I get the feeling I could be watching just about any attractive, smiling face at the podium, not someone who will has the potential to be a “personality” in their own right.
The sets are ok, thought not especially eye catching. I get the “store” look for Temptation, but think they could have done something a little more abstract with the concept so that it doesn’t come across looking like a bad imitation of a store. For Crosswords, the placement of the giant monitor makes everything else look small by comparison; at least in Jeopardy, the game board is separate from Alex and the contestants, and serves as a good “opposite side” wall. Ty standing next to the video screen in Crosswords makes him look tiny, and the rest of the set feels like it’s empty.
The game play on Crosswords is decent, but the spoilers concept feels disjointed, with no real explanation of why they show up or how they get to be in those roles vis a vis to the first two players. Maybe if all five players had some kind of preliminary elimination round in which the lowest three finishers had to wait to play the spoiler round it would make more sense. Temptation’s game just seems inherently dull. Maybe it’s the focus exclusively on pop culture—at least other shows mix up the required knowledge base a bit more.
As a fan of the genre, I wanted the shows to be successful. I wanted to like them. Unfortunately, I don’t think they’ll fly, and it will add more support to the game-shows-don’t-generally-work theory. And maybe that’s true. Maybe people only want to watch squabbling (see the court shows and the Springer/Povich shows) and celebrity fluff (Regis, Ellen, etc.). So be it….my tastes aren’t in sync with the rest of the world. Besides, Jeopardy, Wheel and Millionaire are a good dose of daily games. More than that is just gravy.
